scholarly journals Four reflections on the new global mental health priorities

Author(s):  
José Miguel Caldas-de-Almeida

Abstract The discussion of the achievements and limitations of the strategies prioritised in global mental health that has taken place in recent years contributed to a unified vision for action that addresses the gaps still existing on prevention, treatment, quality of care and human rights protection. This editorial presents four reflections on the impact of this vision on the definition of future priorities, particularly in the areas of policy implementation, services reconfiguration and organisation, human rights and research. It concludes that further debate is needed to redefine the balance between priorities and strategies that can better promote an effective response to the needs of low and middle income countries, and to ensure an efficient coordination of efforts in the future.

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Folashade T Alloh ◽  
Pramod Regmi ◽  
Igoche Onche ◽  
Edwin Van Teijlingen ◽  
Steven Trenoweth

Despite being globally recognised as an important public health issue, mental health is still less prioritised as a disease burden in many Low-and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). More than 70% of the global mental health burden occurs in these countries. We discussed mental health issues in LMICs under themes such as abuse and mental illness, cultural influence on mental health, need for dignity in care, meeting financial and workforce gaps and the need for national health policy for the mental health sector. We highlighted that although mental health education and health care services in most LMICs are poorly resourced; there is an urgent need to address issues beyond funding that contribute to poor mental health. In order to meet the increasing challenge of mental health illness in LMICs, there is a need for effort to address cultural and professional challenges that contribute to poor mental health among individuals. We have a notion that mental health should be integrated into primary health care in LMICs. Creating awareness on the impact of some cultural attitudes/practices will encourage better uptake of mental health services and increase the ease when discussing mental health issues in these countries which can contribute to reducing the poor mental health in LMICs.


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 72-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Lea Fernandes ◽  
Stephanie Cantrill ◽  
Raj Kamal ◽  
Ram Lal Shrestha

Much of the literature about mental illness in low and middle income countries (LMICs) focuses on prevalence rates, the treatment gap, and scaling up access to medical expertise and treatment. As a cause and consequence of this, global mental health programs have focused heavily on service delivery without due exploration of how programs fit into a broader picture of culture and community. There is a need for research which highlights approaches to broader inclusion, considering historical, cultural, social, and economic life contexts and recognises the community as a determinant of mental health — in prevention, recovery, resilience, and support of holistic wellness. The purpose of this practice review is to explore the experiences of three local organisations working with people with psychosocial disability living in LMICs: Afghanistan, India, and Nepal. All three organisations have a wealth of experience in implementing mental health programs, and the review brings together evidence of this experience from interviews, reports, and evaluations. Learnings from these organisations highlight both successful approaches to strengthening inclusion and the challenges faced by people with psychosocial disability, their families, and communities.  The findings can largely be summarised in two categories, although both are very much intertwined: first, a broad advocacy, public health, and policy approach to inclusion; and second, more local, community-based initiatives. The evidence draws attention to the need to acknowledge the complexities surrounding mental health and inclusion, such as additional stigmatisation due to multidimensional poverty, gender inequality, security issues, natural disasters, and additional stressors associated with access. Organisational experiences also highlight the need to work with communities’ strengths to increase capacity around inclusion and to apply community development approaches where space is created for communities to generate holistic solutions. Most significantly, approaches at all levels require efforts to ensure that people with psychosocial disability are given a voice and are included in shaping programs, policies, and appropriate responses.


Author(s):  
Marisha N. Wickremsinhe

AbstractGlobal mental health, as a field, has focused on both increasing access to mental health services and promoting human rights. Amidst many successes in engaging with and addressing various human rights violations affecting individuals living with psychosocial disabilities, one human rights challenge remains under-discussed: involuntary inpatient admission for psychiatric care. Global mental health ought to engage proactively with the debate on the ethics of involuntary admission and work to develop a clear position, for three reasons. Firstly, the field promotes models of mental healthcare that are likely to include involuntary admission. Secondly, the field aligns much of its human rights framework with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which opposes the discriminatory use of involuntary admission on the basis of psychosocial disability or impairment. Finally, global mental health, as a field, is uniquely positioned to offer novel contributions to this long-standing debate in clinical ethics by collecting data and conducting analyses across settings. Global mental health should take up involuntary admission as a priority area of engagement, applying its own orientation toward research and advocacy in order to explore the dimensions of when, if ever, involuntary admission may be permissible. Such work stands to offer meaningful contributions to the challenge of involuntary admission.


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 175-203
Author(s):  
Patricia GOEDDE

AbstractThis article asks how legal mechanisms are employed outside of North Korea to achieve human rights diffusion in the country; to what extent these result in human rights diffusion in North Korea; and whether measures beyond accountability can be pursued in tandem for more productive engagement. Specifically, it examines how the North Korean government has interacted with the globalized legal regime of human rights vis-à-vis the UN and details the legal processes and implications of the UN Commission of Inquiry report, including domestic legislation, and evidence collection. While transnational legal mobilization has gathered momentum on the accountability side, it is significantly weaker in terms of achieving human rights protection within North Korea given the government’s perception of current human rights discourse as part of an externally produced war repertoire. Thus, efforts to engage the North Korean population and government require concurrent reframing of human rights discourse into more localized and relatable contexts.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 01-14
Author(s):  
Michael Galvin

We are in an important moment for mental health treatment around the world, as many Low and Middle Income Countries (LMICs) – representing an increasing majority of the world’s population – are currently developing and scaling up services for the first time. Yet, research on Global Mental Health (GMH) best practices remains scattered and difficult to synthesize. This review aims to simplify existing GMH research on effective biomedical and psychosocial treatment approaches from both high-income countries and LMICs to enable a more comprehensive understanding of the benefits and drawbacks of existing interventions, based on the highest quality, up-to-date research. By understanding which treatments are most effective and why, we can begin to not only implement more effective practices, but guide the future of GMH research in the right directions. The purpose of this review is therefore to understand mental illness, what it is, how it was treated in the past, how it manifests differently around the globe, and how to best treat it. Ultimately, while psychosocial approaches are advised for patients with more mild to moderate disorders, medications and other biomedical approaches are recommended increasingly only for more severe cases. While significant evidence exists to justify the use of psychotropic medications for mental illness, their adverse effects indicate that psychosocial approaches should be prioritized as first line treatments, particularly for mild to moderate disorders. As one of the first to analyze this research, this review is useful not only for GMH scholars, but for practitioners and public health workers globally, as well.


Author(s):  
Kathya Lorena Cordova-Pozo ◽  
Hubert P. L. M. Korzilius ◽  
Etiënne A. J. A. Rouwette ◽  
Gabriela Píriz ◽  
Rolando Herrera-Gutierrez ◽  
...  

Similar interventions to stop the spread of COVID-19 led to different outcomes in Latin American countries. This study aimed to capture the multicausality of factors affecting HS-capacity that could help plan a more effective response, considering health as well as social aspects. A facilitated GMB was constructed by experts and validated with a survey from a wider population. Statistical analyses estimated the impact of the main factors to the HS-capacity and revealed the differences in its mechanisms. The results show a similar four-factor structure in all countries that includes public administration, preparedness, information, and collective self-efficacy. The factors are correlated and have mediating effects with HS-capacity; this is the base for differences among countries. HS-capacity has a strong relation with public administration in Bolivia, while in Nicaragua and Uruguay it is related through preparedness. Nicaragua lacks information as a mediation effect with HS-capacity whereas Bolivia and Uruguay have, respectively, small and large mediation effects with it. These outcomes increase the understanding of the pandemic based on country-specific context and can aid policymaking in low-and middle-income countries by including these factors in future pandemic response models.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document